27

International Journal of the Whole Child

2019, VOL. 4, NO. 2

International Teacher Perspectives on Quality in ECE: A Case Study

Julie Chappella, Judit Szenteb
a
University of South Florida, bUniversity of Central Florida
Julie Chappell, M.A. is a graduate teaching assistant in the College of Education at the
University of South Florida, Tampa. Her former experiences include teaching in elementary,
high school, voluntary prekindergarten and programs supporting children with special needs. Her
research interests include global and comparative education and program evaluation. She is
currently pursuing her doctorate in Early Childhood Education.
Dr. Judit Szente is Professor of Early Childhood Development and Education at the University of
Central Florida. She is passionate about global issues in early childhood and early childhood
teacher education. She participated in international teaching/learning programs in Bulgaria,
Denmark, England, Ethiopia, Finland, Hungary, Italy, Japan, the United States, and Co-Directs
Study Abroad Programs for undergraduate and graduate students.

Abstract
The goal of early childhood programming is to provide children with high-quality early care and
to support educators’ understanding and ability to implement high-quality practices on behalf of
children and their families. Quality in early childhood care is an ambiguous concept, relative to
various social and context-specific factors, making it difficult to define in standardized terms. A
classroom teacher’s proximity to decisions in the early childhood classroom validates the need
for teacher perceptions to be considered in practices regarding high-quality care. This paper
presents a comparative case study that sought to explore teacher perspectives of high-quality care
from two nations, Finland and the United States, and examined how these perspectives differed
or aligned across the influences of culture. Using an interpretivist design for qualitative research
methods, preschool and early year teacher participants completed pre-surveys in which they
rated various indicators of quality. Survey responses guided semi-structured interviews.
Additionally, participants discussed photographs of classroom and school activities that they felt
exhibited quality. In vivo and values coding were used to analyze the interview data and generate
themes in which teachers described high quality. Generating from both participant groups, the
analysis resulted in various themes, such as child-centered classrooms, physical environment,
 28

and highly educated teachers. While language and terminology differed, teachers in Finland and
the United States valued similar indicators of high-quality early programs.
Keywords: comparative, high-quality, early years, early childhood

Introduction
High quality early childhood education is recognized as leading to positive outcomes for children
as well as economic benefits to society (Nores, Belfield, Barnett, & Schweinhart, 2005).
However, scholars warn against a universal definition of high-quality early care. Nearly two
decades ago, Dahlberg, Moss and Pence (1999) recognized the importance of understanding
early childhood education as more than predictable and controlled, as implied by the language of
quality. Quality continues to be an ambiguous term, including both objective and subjective
factors that are relative to values, beliefs, and needs of various stakeholders (Cryer, Tietze, &
Wessels, 2002; Barros & Leal, 2015). As a socially constructed concept (Dahlberg et al., 1999),
the term quality lacks a definitive conceptualization.
By assuming a cross national investigation of teachers’ perceptions, this study aims to situate
quality as a culturally and socially interpreted term while exploring possible associations or
similarities among teachers’ views of high-quality early care. Since measures of quality continue
to be used to determine what is important in the early childhood classroom, teachers’ perceptions
of quality remain essential.
Specifically, the focus of this paper, referred to in Finland as early childhood education and care
(ECEC), occurs before children enter primary education, between the ages of one and six. A
distinction is made between preschool teachers (teachers of pre-primary children at the age of
six) and kindergarten or ECEC teachers (teachers of children between the ages of one and five)
(Finnish National Agency for Education, 2018). In the United States, early childhood education
(ECE), most often referred to as preschool, occurs between birth and age five, after which
children enter their compulsory education as kindergarteners in primary schools. The vast
majority of states offer free voluntary prekindergarten for four-year-old children.
The purpose of this study is to investigate components of high-quality care from the perspectives
of teachers representing Finland and the United States. In focusing on teachers’ perceptions,
teachers become the knowledgeable experts in providing high-quality care. This study begins to
describe how cultural and social factors affect and shape perceptions of high-quality care by
exploring differences and similarities of teachers’ beliefs. The findings of this study begin to
provide a valuable understanding of the global construction of quality from the viewpoint of
educators as important stakeholders in the early childhood classroom setting.
 29

Research Questions
The following research question guided this study:
(1) How do teacher perceptions of quality compare between early childhood teachers in the
United States and Finland?
Within the guiding research question, two sub-questions emerged as:
(2) Which aspects of quality do teachers in the United States and Finland place the most
value? and
(3) What role, if any, does culture and society have in teacher perceptions of quality in the
United States and Finland?
Literature Review
Conceptual Framework
This study seeks to understand teacher perceptions through comparative and socio-cultural
perspectives. Comparative education involves utilizing a critical lens to explore educational
practices and policies from different countries and cultures (Clarkson, 2009). The increasingly
global society in which we live provides impetus for educators, researchers, and practitioners to
examine not only relationships with the wider society, but as well to critically reflect on our own
educational systems and practices by increasing our knowledge and understanding of systems
and practices that differ. Epstein (2017) explains while the field is influenced by many
disciplines, the key indicator of comparative education is the desire for an understanding of
global education. For this reason, the current study seeks to view comparative education through
a socio-cultural lens. Socio-cultural theory is grounded in the work of Lev Vygotsky and
suggests that our interactions and experiences become largely influenced by the culture in which
we live and interact with others. Specifically, Vygotsky’s (1980) sociocultural theory proposes it
is the signs and tools in our environment that initiate social contact with others. Thus, learning or
internalizing, is initially an external, cultural and social activity that becomes part of the
individual. It is through this lens of socio-cultural influences that the current study intends to
explore teachers’ perceptions of quality care.
Quality in Early Childhood
In a generally defined way, quality is considered from structural and process indicators.
Structural indicators include the characteristics of a classroom that can be regulated, such as staff
qualifications and ratios, licensing policies, and facility and maintenance requirements. Process
indicators represent the everyday interactions, experiences, and relationships occurring in an
early childhood environment. While structural and process indicators remain distinct, structural
indicators do effect certain process indicators; for example, wages and teacher education
evidence as structural indicators to influence process indicators (Cassidy et al., 2005).
Quality as a broad concept poses difficulties in providing a universal measure of quality. Quality
measurement tools such as the Classroom Assessment Scoring System (CLASS), Early
 30

Childhood Environment Rating Scale – Revision (ECERS-R), Caregiver Interaction Scale (CIS),
and the Association for Childhood Educational International’s Global Guidelines Assessment
evaluate different facets of quality indicators. After reviewing 11 quality measurement tools with
the intention of analyzing the strengths and weaknesses of each, along with the sustainability of
the tools in an international context, Ishmine and Tayler (2014) conclude that among the tools
evaluated, many lacked some of the core elements of quality to be considered important. More
relevantly, the researchers note that the purpose of quality assessment measures remains critical
to support and provide feedback to teachers in developing and planning curriculum and
interactions (Cottle & Alexander, 2012; Ishmine & Tayler, 2014). Harrist, Thompson and Norris
(2007) evaluated parent and caregiver perspectives on the quality of childcare using formal
rating methods, much like Rentzou (2012) demonstrated in comparing researcher and
practitioner ratings of quality. Evaluations of quality, as previously mentioned, continue to be
subjectively based upon the purposes and priorities of the stakeholder. Woodhead (1998) called
for a contextually based approach to examining quality, as “there are many different potential
criteria of quality which are closely linked to beliefs about the goals and functions of
programmes” (p. 11). A teacher’s obvious proximity to decisions regarding the early childhood
environment underscores the critical importance of teachers’ perceptions of quality in the
classroom.
National Contexts
Finland. The early childhood educational systems in Finland and the United States continue to
be influenced by the various structures, policies, social and cultural contexts unique to each
nation. Education in Finland is viewed as a basic human right for all and is reflected by the
nature of a free schooling, even through both vocational and university levels (Kangaslahti,
2013; Havu-Nuutinen & Niikko, 2014; Finnish National Agency for Education, 2018). Although
the Ministry of Education and Culture, oversees Finish education, educational system decisions
are made collaboratively between all stakeholders, including policy makers, professionals in the
field of education, teachers, parents, and sometimes even students (Kangaslahti, 2013).
Municipalities themselves remain responsible for the operating of schools; principals at each
school are given the authority to manage individual schools, typically in collaboration with
teachers (National Center on Education and the Economy [NCEE], 2015). At the classroom
level, teachers demonstrate the freedom to construct the learning environment, choose learning
materials, and set the curriculum (Kangaslahti, 2013).
Turunen, Määttä, and Uusiautti (2012) discuss how curriculum is “always part of cultural and
political zeitgeist of the society in which it is written; the curricula in early childhood are also
tightly connected to national societal goals” (p. 586). At the time of the current study, the
National Curriculum Guidelines on Early Childhood Education and Care served as the relevant
curriculum document for ECEC in Finland (in Finland published in Finnish in 2003 and English
in 2005). The purposes of the National Curriculum Guidelines on Early Childhood Education
and Care in Finland include: to provide equal opportunities for education across the country, to
evidence developmental activities, and to introduce uniform principles. Emphasis is placed on
the child’s well-being, care and health, play, exploration, physical activities, and language
 31

(National Research and Development Center for Welfare and Health, 2005; Havu-Nuutinen &
Niikko, 2014). The new National Core Curriculum for ECEC was released after study
completion. While the new curriculum is considered a standard rather than a guideline, local
municipalities continue to maintain authority to develop their own curricula based from the new
core curriculum. Kangaslahti (2013) cautions that the Finnish educational system (or any other
national system) cannot merely be copied into another cultural context, though it does provide an
important example. The Finnish ECEC system is highly dependent on the cultural factors of
equality, trust, and responsibility, the high quality of teachers, and the research-based pedagogy
of child-centeredness and care.
United States. Current United States ECE policy evidences historical roots beginning in the
1960s. Many early childhood programs originated as a response to the War on Poverty initiatives
in the mid-1960s and the economic Opportunity Act of 1964 (Winter & Kelley, 2008), initially
developed to target high-risk, impoverished, and economically and socially disadvantaged
children. In 1989, the National Educational Goals 2000 introduced the goal of education as
producing an improved workforce, thus highlighting the top-down need for children to be better
prepared for school (Winter & Kelley, 2008). Neuman (2015) writes about the current policy
goals, including a focus on improving the quality of early childhood programs and providing
equitable access to quality programs for supporting children from lower socio-economic areas.
An emerging focus of early childhood programs in the United States is the idea of school
readiness, preparing children for formal schooling in kindergarten, resulting in policy makers
becoming more fixated on the long-term investment of early care (Brooks & Murray, 2018).
DeBruin and Slutzky (2016) explored the early learning standards across the different states in
the U.S., noting the variance in standards alignment to age and grade level ranges. Evans (2013)
acknowledged the pre-primary approach to school readiness, commonly found in the United
States, primarily focuses on child outcomes, standards-based models, and basic academic skills
required for school.
Methodology
Design
The study used a comparative case study approach to data collection and analysis. Case studies
become useful when a researcher seeks to investigate a particular group of individuals, program
or techniques (Lichtman, 2013). This study most aligns with the case study views illustrated by
Sharan Merriam and Robert Stake, which assume the constructivist lens of epistemology (Yazan,
2015). Yazan (2015) explains both Merriam and Stake understand reality is constructed,
multiple viewpoints exist, and researchers remain interpreters of information; researchers
construct their own meaning from the findings, although Merriam also acknowledges the
influences of researchers views on the interpretations. Following an interpretivist paradigm in
design, the aim is to develop deep, comprehensive understanding of topics through multiple
perspectives (Mackenzie & Knipe, 2006). Thanh and Thanh (2015) explain the interpretivist as
one that values subjectivity and dismisses universal standards of human behavior and research.
 32

In this study, a rich understanding of quality from two varying cultures and various individuals
supports the interpretivist design.
Sample
The inclusion criteria for teacher participants was solely limited to current classroom teachers
working in an early childhood setting that taught in Finland. This included kindergarten (ages
birth to five) and pre-primary (age six) teachers, and in the United States this included infant,
toddler and preschool teachers (ages birth to five). The three teacher participants in Finland
represent three different centers, each with varying local contexts, school specific goals and
structures. One Finnish teacher participant was from a pre-primary class within a primary school,
and the other two teachers interacted with children in kindergartens with children through the age
of five years of age. In the United States, both teacher participants were in preschool classrooms
with children ages three and four. The two teacher participants from the U.S. were also at the
same school. Demographic data on the teachers were not deemed pertinent to the current study
and thus not collected from participants; however, each participant was a qualified teacher with a
bachelor or master’s degree in teaching the specific age group with which they worked.
Procedures
The total number of participants in the study was five: three early years teachers residing in
Finland and two preschool teachers in the United States. An exemplary sampling method was
used to request participation from individuals at schools and early care centers in Finland
connected with a partnering university through a study abroad program during the spring
semester of 2016. Before the program began, directors or principals were emailed study
permission requests. The final sample of Finnish participants included three early childhood
teachers from three different centers, with two of the interviews approved for audio-recording.
Exemplary sampling was again used in the United States during the spring semester of 2018 as
participants were also sought from a child-care center connected to the university. The center
director was contacted and emailed study permission requests, along with the pre-surveys for
teachers to complete ahead of time. The two interviews conducted were audio recorded.
Data Collection
In order to answer the research questions, data were collected in the form of pre-surveys,
interviews, researcher notes and audio-transcriptions, and photo elicitations when available. The
setting for each interview varied depending on the availability of space. In Finland, two of the
interviews were conducted in a space used by children during the interview (a hallway and a
dining and play area). The last interview in Finland was conducted in a classroom kitchen area
that children were not using at the time. In the United States, both interviews were conducted in
teacher workspaces. The interview lengths also varied depending on time availability and ranged
from eight to 45 minutes. Each teacher (representing Finland and U.S.) used their teacher
preparation and/or break time to complete the interview. Prior to the interview, teachers
completed a pre-survey in which they rated indicators of quality based on the Association for
Childhood Education International (ACEI) Global Guidelines Assessment (GGA). The results of
the survey guided the interview questions. The pre-survey also provided space for teachers to
 33

input their own indicators of high quality they felt were not included in the GGA. Semi-
structured interviews focused on the indicators rated as most important as well as any additional
indicators provided by the participant. In addition, teachers in Finland were given a camera and
asked to walk through the center and take pictures of ideas they thought illustrated high-quality.
Teachers in the United States had pictures prepared for the interview session.
During the interviews, the first author also jotted down notes to highlight salient points made by
interviewees. These notes were added to the transcripts, but were not coded if directly redundant
with other codes found in the interviewee’s transcription. It is also pertinent to note that only two
of the three Finnish interviews were audio recorded. The third interview was documented by
note taking. For this reason, the coding of this interview only included values coding, as
verbatim quotes cannot be verified. Both interviews conducted with U.S. teachers were audio
recorded and research notes were limited to clarifying questions.
Data Analysis
In order to answer the research questions, inductive, open coding was used to eliminate
researcher preconceptions and focus on emergent concepts generated within the data (Lin, 2013).
To satisfy the purposes of the research, two different coding methods were used in the first cycle
coding analysis. Since the primary focus of the research was to understand the teacher
perceptions of high-quality early childcare, in vivo coding was utilized to honor each
participant’s voice and ideas (Miles, Huberman, & Saldaña, 2014). This was particularly vital in
this study as the researcher only speaks English and participants from Finland spoke English as a
second language. The second first cycle coding method applied was a variation of values coding,
which is appropriate in studies that wish to convey a participant’s values, attitudes and beliefs.
(Miles et al., 2014; Saldaña, 2009). However, during the values coding process, the decision was
made to replace the code of ‘belief’ to ‘practice.’ This change was made during a peer and
mentor evaluation session, and documented in the auditable decision trail, to provide a more
accurate description and richer analysis of the photo elicitation piece of the interview that
focused on aspects of the interviewee’s current practices that they perceived to display high-
quality. Values coding in this study included attitudes (defined as participants’ thoughts or
feelings about aspects of quality), values (defined as aspects of quality that participants place
value), and practices (defined as activities the participants do to promote or show high-quality).
After transcribing and coding the interviews (in vivo and values coding), each code was
summarized into a short concept and then labeled with one of the emerging themes.
Results
Emergent Themes
Category and theme names from each set of interviews were chosen independent of each other,
and then similar categories and themes were merged. Figure 1 below displays the emergent
themes generated from the data analysis. Eight themes, as shown in the double-sided arrow, were
common between both Finnish and U. S. teachers, while other themes were specific to each
country.
 34

Figure 1. Emergent themes. This figure illustrates the common and country-specific themes
developed through data analysis.
Common Emergent Themes
Environment. The environment theme was the largest with multiple sub-categories. Each of the
Finnish teachers commented on the importance of a flexible and adaptable environment based on
children’s interests. Teachers described the physical environment and materials as needing to be
“inspiring,” “clean,” “secure,” and “interesting,” as well as to “motivate” and have “space.” As
co-constructors of the environment, the children’s needs and interests drive the room
arrangement and materials presented. As it will be discussed later, part of a teacher’s role is
actively listening to children, which includes creating spaces with and for children that will
engage them, lead to social interactions, and promote their well-being. The teachers from the
United States highlighted predictable expectations and routines as important to the environment,
and further described the physical environment itself as promoting independence. Critically, the
physical environment promotes children’s ability to flexibly move items about the classroom;
children access resources without asking for a teacher’s assistance.
Interactions. Child-child and teacher-child interactions were included in the final interviews.
One interviewee noted that teacher-child interactions are the “basis for everything.” This is
supported by other statements that teachers should “not be absent” but rather be present in their
interactions with young children. One-on-one time with children is valued, despite difficulties of
large classes. Child-child interactions are supported by teachers that facilitate problem solving
when needed. One U.S. teacher emphasized the value of nurturing teacher-child interactions in
creating a foundation for later learning.
Pedagogy and experience. During the final interviews, participants were asked about what
influenced their decision-making regarding high quality care; respondents identified education
and experience. The teachers described their multiple education degrees and years of experience
working with children, including the years to achieve their degrees. The term pedagogy was
chosen as an emerging theme rather than education or studies, because it better captures the
essence of how the teachers described their educational experiences. One interviewee elaborated
that teachers should continually research, update their knowledge and apply new pedagogical
knowledge to their teaching. Part of this included communicating with colleagues and sharing
ideas, which was included in this emergent theme.
 35

Child-centered. Child-centeredness was a theme for both teachers from the U.S. and Finland.
Although the term was not specifically used when discussing children, the theme was woven into
aspects of the teacher’s role and the environment. For example, interviewees in Finland
described that teachers should “look after the child’s benefit” and that the “child is in the center”
of the environment. In Finland, the teachers viewed child-centeredness as the ability of children
to make their own choices and make decisions about the classroom and their own learning. One
interviewee stated that children “are to be the adults” in planning and creating an environment
for themselves. Furthermore, the furniture and materials should be child sized and appropriate
for the children’s age and development. In the teacher interviews (U.S.), child-centeredness
focused on the importance of listening to children’s interests in order to guide activities and
support learning topics. Using a project approach, one class in the U.S. chose to explore
airplanes by testing paper airplanes, dramatizing plane rides, and learning about the various roles
of airline employees. Moreover, one of the teachers representing the U.S. explained “quality
education doesn’t necessarily mean that…teachers have to own every moment.” The teacher
goes on to explain that unstructured movement, play or outside time is important for children to
experience.
Respect. While following the codes for child-centered, the word respect was repeated time and
again. It became evident that a distinction would need to be made between statements that
focused on applications of child-centeredness (a teacher following children’s interests in
planning activities, or children’s abilities to make choices about what they want to do, as
described above) and statements about valuing children’s input and their contributions to the
classroom. For example, one of the teachers in the U.S. explains that children’s attempts at
learning, prior knowledge and feelings should be respected. The teacher discussed how children
are competent enough to make choices about who they do and do not want to hug, or how they
want to be greeted in the morning. In the same sense, the Finnish interviewees valued children’s
agency, and commented that children should be trusted.
The whole child. The emergence of the whole child was developed particularly as a subset of
many of the other themes such as the teacher’s role, child-centered and the environment. As the
interviewees representing Finland discussed aspects of quality that were easily coded into the
theme of environment, the participants also explored the ideas of supporting the child’s entire
well-being with areas for rest and food, cleanliness and safety. The terms “nurture” and “well-
being” and “emotion” were mentioned in discussing the teacher’s interactions with children, and
that “the care has always been more important than the education of the teaching aspect of early
childhood education.” The child’s emotional development and holistic well-being were discussed
as being more important than academic knowledge and teaching. The interviewees from the U.S.
discussed supporting the whole child in ways such as role-playing conflict resolution, using job
charts to help children feel ownership, and making sure children have moments that are just pure
and happy.
Teacher’s role. Both the Finnish and U.S. interviewees shared a variety of roles that are vital for
educators. The teacher’s role was described by a Finnish interviewee as “the very heart of this
work comes from…the ethic and values that we have as being the…adults that raise the children
 36

here;” the role encompasses the teacher’s attitude, interactions, education and knowledge,
listening skills and flexibility. The teachers from Finland discussed practices such as setting up
the environment with the children, focusing on the “care and the nurture,” facilitating problem
solving and social skills with children, listening actively and being present with them, and
applying knowledge of pedagogy to the selection of classroom materials and adapting to the
needs of children. The Finnish participants believed teachers do not merely attain knowledge of
early childhood education; rather, they possess the years of experience and understanding of how
to use the E.C. knowledge in the classroom. Teachers should be able to provide engaging
materials and spend time with children in one-on-one sessions. Another role of the teacher
involves planning and incorporating cross-curricular activities that meet the needs and interests
of all children. The interviewees from the U.S. mentioned roles such as modeling positive
language, helping children to feel good about coming to school, guiding social and emotional
learning, multitasking, using teachable moments effectively, and, “always being proactive,” to
ensure that children know the expectations and can begin to self-regulate.
Society. The theme of society, not initially seen as a direct indicator of quality, emerged as the
participants spoke about how society views teaching. In terms of providing high-quality care, it
is inferred that the teachers valued their autonomy in the classroom, even though society may
not. While asking about cultural influences, one of the interviewees in Finland responded by
describing the contrast between what teachers experience of the complexities of teaching and
how she perceived society to view teaching. This participant mentioned that teachers are
underappreciated and people outside of education do not know what it is like, stating, “they don’t
actually know what we do here.” Similarly, interviewees in the United States recognized teachers
do not often receive credit for the work they do, but believe teachers remain critical to the lives
and development of children. A participant from the U.S. said, “We’re trying to squeeze
childhood into everything else we’re doing today.” In order to promote high-quality care, it is
critical for educators to be valued and respected to demonstrate the freedom and autonomy to
make decisions on behalf of the children in their classrooms.
Finland Generated Theme
Family. Emerging solely from the Finnish interviews were discussions of families and parents.
The emergent theme remains simply as “Family” because the more specific topics of
involvement, engagement, and parental role did not align with all the statements and codes
regarding families. Teachers spoke slightly of the teacher’s role in meeting with families and
valuing their input, but the focus was more on the child’s needs and not the family’s. Two of the
Finnish interviewees alluded to the fact that parents are sometimes “not interested in all those
things” such as the day-to-day activities and goals, or that parents are busy and don’t need to be
bothered about all the details and specifics. Communication with families about their child’s
main goals and planning for learning is a sign of quality mentioned in the interviews.
U. S. Generated Themes
Education. Regarding teacher qualifications, the interviewees from the U.S. primarily focused
on the need to develop highly educated individuals working with children. For the participants
 37

representing the U.S., highly educated also meant teachers were life-long learners participating
in continuing education and professional growth opportunities. Both interviewees mentioned an
article they recently read in order to keep themselves abreast of relevant research and current
ideas in early childhood education. Some continuing education opportunities teachers mentioned
included webinars, classes, and conferences.
Classroom climate. One of the sub-categories of the Environment evolved as a unique theme:
Classroom Climate. This theme generated from statements reported by teachers from the United
States. In quality programs, it is critical for children to feel a sense of belonging. Employing
teacher encouragement, identifying clear and consistent expectations, implementing activities
promoting classroom families, and assigning class tasks supporting children’s empowerment and
group membership frames classroom climate to develop children’s positive self-images.
Feelings of safety, in the sense of risk-taking, were grouped with this theme because the teachers
explained that if children, “do not feel safe, they are not willing to take chances and learning is a
lot of taking chances.” On the contrary, when “a child feels belonging and feels calm and safe,
they are able to grow from there.”
Curriculum. Another theme that emerged from the interviewees in the United States included
the need for teachers in high-quality programs to provide children with a variety of activities to
support learning. While the children’s interests may guide the activities, it is the responsibility of
the teacher to plan a variety of experiences that support a child across all learning domains. As
one of the U.S. interviewees explained, “children need to be given a variety of
experiences…’cause there are all different type learners. They learn in different ways, so we
need to give them opportunities to experience things differently.” The teachers from the U.S.
stressed that not one single approach works best for all children. Thus, the theme of curriculum is
not an indicator of using a pre-packaged curriculum model, but rather, facilitating a variety of
daily learning experiences across all domains, not forgetting the gross motor domain,
experiences that are meaningful to children and their different learning styles. Moreover, one
interviewee emphasized play as the essential avenue for children’s learning. The teacher stated,
“they have to have the building blocks before they can learn to read. And that’s all,
running, jumping, playing, talking, singing. It’s got nothing to do with worksheets…”
Conclusions
This study focuses on comparing teachers’ perceptions of high-quality early care among teachers
in Finland and the United States, seeking to gain insight to the cultural or societal distinctions.
As a comparative case study, this research did not aim to generalize teacher perceptions across
all of Finland or the United States, but rather to provide a voice to the teachers who are often
rigidly judged according to the high-quality standards that they provide. In a statement
combining perspectives of six experienced early educators from Africa, India, Europe and the
United States, Jalongo et al. (2004) explore an earlier version of ACEI’s Global Guidelines for
the Education and Care of Young Children and provide insight that supports the notion of
similarities existing in our global view of high-quality early care. In much the same way, this
study purports that evaluations of high-quality are not systematic across societies and nations,
 38

but this study also values the multiple perspectives that comparative education research can
highlight.
In addressing the first research question, the analysis of interview data suggests that there are
similarities between how Finnish and U. S. teachers view high quality care. The attitude of each
interviewee was that of excitement, passion, and respect for providing children with the best
possible care. Common emergent themes included child-centeredness, interactions (focused on
teacher-child interactions), the teacher’s role in the classroom, pedagogy and experience of the
teacher, respect for children, societal influences, respecting the child, and supporting the whole
child. The second research question is addressed in highlighting the differences that existed in
terminology used and emphasis on which indicators may be more important to quality. For
example, in the Finnish data, two teachers spoke of the need for a flexible environment, one that
responds to the needs and the interests of the children. In the interviews with teachers from the
U.S., the theme of environment focuses on the physical set up and promotion of independence.
Both the teachers from the U.S. and Finland stressed the importance of putting the children first,
whether that means supporting their interests in the curriculum or trusting that they can make
competent choices.
The last research question regarded the influences of teacher perceptions. When asked about
possible influences regarding their ideas, both groups of participating teachers described
education and experience as influencing their beliefs associated with high quality care and,
similarly, both groups recognized and made statements describing the value of childhood.
According to one teacher, “we’re trying to squeeze childhood into everything else we’re doing.”
Society and our way of life seem to be pushing childhood away, primarily by individuals outside
the field and decision makers that “don’t actually know what we do.” The teachers felt that the
early childhood profession warrants respect and appreciation adequate to justify their making
decisions about their classrooms and the children they nurture.
Limitations
Qualitatively, a small-scale case study as demonstrated here, has its limitations. Teachers were
purposively selected as exemplar teachers and because of their connections to university
programs. Both nations represented are developed, White-European nations and may already
represent quality standards that are similar. Language was another limitation, as the researcher
did not know Finnish. Although the Finnish teachers spoke English well, it is probable that some
concepts and ideas were made ambiguous in translation. It is important to also note the role of
the researcher in data coding. While in vivo and values coding were selected to enhance the
participant’s ideas and values, the researcher ultimately made the final decisions about the
emerging themes, and as such, themes are regarded in terms of the researchers’ own vocabulary.
Furthermore, the emergent themes do not contain an exhaustive list of participant values of high-
quality. A lack of an emergent theme, for example, the theme of Families discussed only by
Finnish teachers, is not meant to implied as devalued by teachers from the United States.
 39

Future Research
This study provides a vital initial step in honoring teacher knowledge and expertise of high-
quality program standards. Teachers from Finland and the U.S. recognized their own education,
experiences and ideas about pedagogy influence what they valued in the classroom. An
important feature of future research would be an analysis of the content of teacher preparation
programs in both nations. This would aim to enhance knowledge of cultural and societal
influences mentioned by both groups of teachers. Since experience was also stated as an
influence, it is recommended that future studies on high-quality early care in education employ a
sampling method to include a variety of teacher experience levels.

Acknowledgements
Special thanks are given to Dr. David Boote at the University of Central Florida, College of
Community Innovation and Education, for his practice and advice regarding decoding of the
interview data and Dr. Jennifer Wolgemuth at the University of South Florida, College of
Education, for her initial feedback and refinement in reporting aspects of the research design.
 40

References
Barros, S., & Leal, T.B. (2015). Parents’ and teachers’ perceptions of quality in Portuguese
childcare classrooms. European Journal Of Psychology Of Education, 30(2), 209-226.
Brooks, E., & Murray, J. (2018). Ready, steady, learn: School readiness and children’s voices in
English early childhood settings, Education 3-13, 46(2), 143-156.
doi:10.1080/03004279.2016.1204335
Cassidy, D., Hestenes, L., Hansen, J., Hegde, A., Shim, J., & Hestenes, S. (2005). Revisiting the
two faces of child care quality: Structure and process. Early Education & Development,
16(4), 505-520.
Clarkson, J. (2009). What is comparative education. In W. Bignold & L. Gayton (Eds.), Global
issues and comparative education, (pp. 4-17). Exeter, England: Learning Matters.
Cottle, M., & Alexander, E. (2012). Quality in early years settings: Government, research and
practitioners’ perspectives. British Educational Research Journal, 38(4), 635-654.
doi:10.1080/01411926.2011.571661
Cryer, D., Tietze, W., & Wessels, H. (2002). Parents’ perceptions of their children’s child care:
A cross-national comparison. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 17, 259-277.
doi:10.1016/S0885-2006(02)00148-5
Dahlberg, G., Moss, P., & Pence, A. (1999). Beyond quality in early childhood education and
care: Postmodern perspectives. London, England: Routledge Falmer.
DeBruin, P.A., & Slutzky, C. (2016). Exploring pre-K age 4 learning standards and their role in
early childhood education: Research and policy implications. ETS Research Reports
Series, 2016(1), 1-52.
Epstein, E. H. (2017). Is Marc-Antoine Jullien de Paris the ‘father’ of comparative education?
Compare: A Journal of Comparative and International Education, 47(3), 317–331.
https://doi.org/10.1080/03057925.2016.1254542
Evans, K. (2013). “School readiness”: The struggle for complexity. LEARNing Landscapes, 7(1),
171-186.
Finnish National Agency for Education. (2018). Finnish education in a nutshell. Retrieved from
https://www.oph.fi/en/statistics-and-publications/publications/finnish-education-nutshell
Harrist, A. W., Thompson, S. D., & Norris, D. J. (2007). Defining quality childcare: Multiple
stakeholder perspectives. Early Education & Development, 18(2), 305–336.
doi:10.1080/10409280701283106
Havu-Nuutinen, S., & Niikko, A. (2014). Finnish primary school as a learning environment for
six-year-old preschool children. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal,
22(5), 621-636.
Ishmine, K., & Tayler, C. (2014). Assessing quality in early childhood education and care.
European Journal of Education, 49(2), 272-290. doi:10.1111/ejed.12043
Jalongo, M., Fennimore, B., Pattnaik, J., Laverick, D., Brewster, J., & Mutuku, M. (2004).
Blended perspectives: A global vision for high-quality early childhood education. Early
Childhood Education Journal, 32(3), 143–155.
https://doi.org/10.1023/B:ECEJ.0000048966.13626.be
Kangaslahti, J.K. (2013). A public education system can excel. Euromentor, 4(1), 7-13.
Lichtman, M. (2013). Qualitative research in education: A user’s guide (3rd ed.). Los Angeles,
CA: Sage.
 41

Lin, C.S. (2013). Revealing the ‘essence’ of things: Using phenomenology in LIS research.
Qualitative and Quantitative Methods in Libraries, 4, 468-478. Retrieved on April 26,
2018 from
http://www.qqml.net/papers/December_2013_Issue/2413QQML_Journal_2013_ChiShio
uLIn_4_469_478.pdf
Mackenzie, N., & Knipe, S. (2006). Research dilemmas: Paradigms, methods and methodology.
Issues In Educational Research, 16, 193-205.
Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldaña, J. (2014). Qualitative data analysis: A methods
sourcebook (3rd ed.). Los Angeles, CA: SAGE.
National Center on Education and the Economy (NCEE) (2015). Finland: System and school
organization. Retrieved from http://www.ncee.org/programs-affiliates/center-on-
international-education-benchmarking/top-performing-countries/finland-
overview/finland-ssytem-and-school-organization/
National Research and Development Center for Welfare and Health (2005). National curriculum
guidelines on early childhood education and care in Finland. Retrieved from
http://www.julkari.fi/bitstream/handle/10024/75535/267671cb-0ec0-4039-b97b-
7ac6ce6b9c10.pdf?sequence=1
Nores, M., Belfield, C.R., Barnett, W.A., & Schweinhart, L. (2005). Updating the economic
impacts of the High/Scope Perry Preschool Program. Educational Evaluation and Policy
Analysis, (3), 245.
Neuman, S.B. (2015). Describing the early childhood policy landscape in the USA. In L. Huo,
S.B. Neuman & A. Nanakida (Eds.), Early childhood education in three cultures: China,
Japan and the United States (pp. 53-60). Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer.
Rentzou, K. (2012). Quality of care and educational provided by Greek day-care centres: An
approach from researcher’s and early childhood educators’ perspective. Early Child
Development & Care, 182(10), 1335.
Saldaña, J. (2009). The coding manual for qualitative researchers. London, England: Sage
Publications. Retrieved from
http://stevescollection.weebly.com/uploads/1/3/8/6/13866629/saldana_2009_the-coding-
manual-for-qualitative-researchers.pdf
Thanh, N.C., & Thanh, T.T. (2015). The interconnection between interpretivist paradigm and
qualitative methods in education. American Journal of Education Science, 1(2), 24-27.
Retrieved from
https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/79e6/888e672cf2acf8afe2ec21fd42a29b2cbd90.pdf
Turunen, T.T., Määttä, K., & Uusiautti, S. (2012). Experts of good educators- or both? The
development of early childhood educators’ expertise in Finland. Early Child
Development & Care, 182(3/4), 487-504.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1980). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes.
Harvard University Press. Retrieved from https://ebookcentral.proquest.com
Winter, S. M., & Kelley, M. F. (2008). Forty years of school readiness research. Childhood
Education, 84(5), 260-266.
Woodhead, M. (1998). “Quality” in early childhood programmes- a contextually appropriate
approach. International Journal of Early Years Education, 6(1), 5-17.
 42

Yazan, B. (2015). Three approaches to case study methods in education; Yin, Merriam, and
Stake. The Qualitative Report, 20(2), 134-152.